• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you support the legalization of prostitution?

Do you support the legalization of prostitution?

  • Total voters
    120
idea_steed said:
Also, legalizing it cannot eliminate the black market. Regulation means higher cost. Poor men may resort to individual hookers.
Click to expand...
The market rate for sex generally works out to a weeks worth of earnings for unskilled labor - this is the average worldwide. As long as rates don't deviate too far from that, you can limit grey and black market P4P. Of course, it's nearly impossible to stamp out $20 crackhoes, but that's a symptom of another problem entirely and shouldn't have any impact on ones desire to legalize P4P.
 
foadi said:
Ok, take lets use termas in Rio De Janeiro (like Centaurus or 4x4), or saunas in Macau (Sanado, 18, Rio, etc) as an example. Would it be possible to turn those sorts of venues into co-ops? Would require millions in investment, hundreds of employees, and a bunch of other stuff. Seems like co-op's would be relatively basic, small, and boring in comparison.
Click to expand...

I don't see why the need for glamorous prostitution facilities outweighs the need to protect prostitutes from exploitation (which is the primary reason I support legalization in the first place).
 
jamesrage said:
It should be legal but heavily regulated to ensure the health of the prostitute and and customer are protected and for the financial protection of the prostitute. Frequent checks for STDs, no unprotected sex by both the prostitute and customer,and frequent health inspections of the place of business regardless if that business is private home, cat house or some other facility where the prostitute works.There should also be wage/pay protections to ensure that the prostitute gets to keep the majority of her pay earned from her services so that she is not taken taken advantage of by a pimp,'employment' agency, brothel, cat house or some other employer.
Click to expand...

Why do you assume the prostitutes will all be women?
 
radcen said:
Are you suggesting that because we can't fix everything
Click to expand...

If by everything you mean the overwhelming majority of what you're fixing, then yes. If by everything you mean a hyperbolic number, the no.
 
Though it sounds a bit daft at first, I would be in favor of:

Legal to sell. Illegal to buy. Illegal to pimp.
 
the_recruit said:
Though it sounds a bit daft at first, I would be in favor of:

Legal to sell. Illegal to buy. Illegal to pimp.
Click to expand...

That's called decriminalize. It doesn't do much to stamp out actual pimps anymore than it stamps out illegal weedmen.
 
Lursa said:
I've been reading in another thread that it's almost 'guaranteed' that local police depts will be corrupt and predatory if it's legalized.

Like that's an excuse? Like they shouldnt be held to their normal standards? What, they are so weak they cant resist? (IMO it is really disrespectful of police in general)

There's precedent with Prohibition. Didnt make them right, and didnt prevent us from ending Prohibition. It is utterly ridiculous to use police corruption as an excuse to keep prostitution illegal. Those cops are supposed to be protecting the entire community. If they cant do that properly...then clean house. It is not to be tolerated.

it really has zero to do with if prostitution should be legal or not. If it should be legal, then you fight the actual crime...which is corruption.
Click to expand...

It's as dumb as the "gateway drug" argument. You're forcing people to buy from a drug dealer and then blame the substance for them buying other drugs? The guy's job is to deal drugs!
 
radcen said:
In a realistic sense, how does this work to supposedly solve the problems that we have now?
Click to expand...
The theory is that it empowers working girls to come forward in cases of abuses, but in practice it doesn't change anything.
 
Medusa said:
haaha :mrgreen:
he is doing what father junior bushes used to do
Click to expand...



Exactly mu point. naming all of the politicians in the USA would have exceeded the character limit for this forum while demonstrating no high character in any way.

Oh, the irony!
 
code1211 said:
Exactly mu point. naming all of the politicians in the USA would have exceeded the character limit for this forum while demonstrating no high character in any way.

Oh, the irony!
Click to expand...

l make my joke but still claim junior bush has been the stupidiest president ever seen in USA
:lol:
 
Bush was a man of great vision and honor. A truth teller sent down to us directly by G-d to lead us in these difficult times.
 
Medusa said:
l make my joke but still claim junior bush has been the stupidiest president ever seen in USA
:lol:
Click to expand...



That's a high perch to place any person upon.

With so many ill advised decisions and strategies enacted by so many ill advised and poorly prepared bribed political acolytes who have held that office, calling anyone the stupidest is hard to support.

I believe in my heart that invading Iraq was a monumental mistake. That was a response to a situation into which Bush was cast.

I also believe in my heart that abandoning Iraq to the forces who now dominate it was a monumental mistake. That was a response to a situation into which Obama was cast.

We needed for this period, two giants of wisdom and diplomacy with iron wills and stead fast moral compasses.

We have elected two ideologues with political aspirations and idiotic adherence to those who bribe them effectively.

Both managed to double the national debt and both managed to erode the standing or our country internationally. Obama is departing from the legal administration of his duties to a greater degree than did Bush and i would advance him to your perch as well as Bush.

Could they share this lofty honor?
 
foadi said:
Bush was a man of great vision and honor. A truth teller sent down to us directly by G-d to lead us in these difficult times.
Click to expand...

l had guessed hat there was somethign wrong with you ,what a trolling post :lamo

anyway lest stay on topic
 
code1211 said:
That's a high perch to place any person upon.

With so many ill advised decisions and strategies enacted by so many ill advised and poorly prepared bribed political acolytes who have held that office, calling anyone the stupidest is hard to support.

I believe in my heart that invading Iraq was a monumental mistake. That was a response to a situation into which Bush was cast.

I also believe in my heart that abandoning Iraq to the forces who now dominate it was a monumental mistake. That was a response to a situation into which Obama was cast.

We needed for this period, two giants of wisdom and diplomacy with iron wills and stead fast moral compasses.

We have elected two ideologues with political aspirations and idiotic adherence to those who bribe them effectively.

Both managed to double the national debt and both managed to erode the standing or our country internationally. Obama is departing from the legal administration of his duties to a greater degree than did Bush and i would advance him to your perch as well as Bush.

Could they share this lofty honor?
Click to expand...

it was more than mistake ,lets agree prostitution shouldnt be a legalized activity
 
Hatuey said:
That's called decriminalize.
Click to expand...

Call it whatever you want. The point is that there would be no criminal penalties for prostitutes. But there would be criminal penalties for John's. And pimps.

Hatuey said:
It doesn't do much to stamp out actual pimps anymore than it stamps out illegal weedmen.
Click to expand...

Who said anything about "stamping them out"? There will always be pimps and there will always be John's. That's not the point.
 
I do support legal prostitution. If those who state a woman's body is her own and she can do with it as she pleases, abortion comes to mind. Those who support the right to choose also should support legal prostitution for the same reasons.
 
Perotista said:
I do support legal prostitution. If those who state a woman's body is her own and she can do with it as she pleases, abortion comes to mind. Those who support the right to choose also should support legal prostitution for the same reasons.
Click to expand...

prostitution is an industry that hurts human's honor and harms society in every aspect .it is not a personal issue
 
radcen said:
In a realistic sense, how does this work to supposedly solve the problems that we have now?
Click to expand...

The point is to minimize trafficking.

It's an economic argument. There's a certain number of men willing to buy prostitutes. And there is a certain number of women willing to sell sex. If the demand exceeds supply, sex traffickers stand to make money by filling in the gap by forcing women to prostitute.

When you straight up legalize prostitution, the number of men willing to buy prostitutes, the demand, increases (because there's no more risk of ending up in jail). And the number of women willing to prostitute, the supply, increases (because there's no more risk of ending up in jail). However, if the increase in demand is larger than the increase in supply, that can create an even larger gap for sex traffickers to fill with forced prostitution. So, legalization can actually cause more sex trafficking, not less.

And, empirically, that's what the data has shown. A number of European countries, most notably Germany, have recently legalized prostitution and found that it hasn't helped with issues like sex trafficking, abuse, etc.

So the theory is this. Maximize the number of willing prostitutes (the supply) by making it legal to sell and minimize the number of John's willing to buy (the demand) by criminalizing purchasing. This will ensure the smallest gap between (voluntary) supply and demand, which leaves the smallest window for sex traffickers to profit.

Sweden has implemented this counter-intuitive strategy and has had some promising results.
 
the_recruit said:
The point is to minimize trafficking.

It's an economic argument. There's a certain number of men willing to buy prostitutes. And there is a certain number of women willing to sell sex. If the demand exceeds supply, sex traffickers stand to make money by filling in the gap by forcing women to prostitute.

When you straight up legalize prostitution, the number of men willing to buy prostitutes, the demand, increases (because there's no more risk of ending up in jail). And the number of women willing to prostitute, the supply, increases (because there's no more risk of ending up in jail). However, if the increase in demand is larger than the increase in supply, that can create an even larger gap for sex traffickers to fill with forced prostitution. So, legalization can actually cause more sex trafficking, not less.

And, empirically, that's what the data has shown. A number of European countries, most notably Germany, have recently legalized prostitution and found that it hasn't helped with issues like sex trafficking, abuse, etc.

So the theory is this. Maximize the number of willing prostitutes (the supply) by making it legal to sell and minimize the number of John's willing to buy (the demand) by criminalizing purchasing. This will ensure the smallest gap between (voluntary) supply and demand, which leaves the smallest window for sex traffickers to profit.

Sweden has implemented this counter-intuitive strategy and has had some promising results.
Click to expand...
A reasoned argument, but I just find it disingenuous. Then again, I don't find the concept of prostitution to be "bad" to begin with, and I go back to the "you can legally give it away for free..." aspect. If you can legally give it away, then you (lawmakers) are admitting it's not "bad". IMO it's the criminal status that enhances the bad element.

No matter what is done, there will always be some issues. There will always be some level of trafficking. Primarily for the lowest end involving drug addicts (though I think that would be greatly lessened), and underage kids. Whether we go 0% and keep it illegal, 50% decriminalization, or 100% fully legal, there is no panacea.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom